Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [fusion] html docs woes
From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-07-18 21:07:03

On 7/18/2011 8:53 PM, Joel de Guzman wrote:
> On 7/18/2011 5:10 PM, Daniel James wrote:
>> On 18 July 2011 08:33, Joel de Guzman <joel_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> I think what Eric is saying is that if you have to update from SVN anyway,
>>> then Daniel James's solution is reasonable: redirects in subversion
>>> to take you to the rebuilt docs, which means that 1) when you do a regen
>>> of the docs, you don't commit the HTML pages 2) You upload the docs somewhere
>>> where you can redirect to.
>>> Seems reasonable...
>>> What I am not sure about is that it seems that the steps needed to do this
>>> is basically the same (or even more laborious ?) than just committing the
>>> HTMLs. After all, quickbook/docbook is now better at avoiding extra diffs
>>> from regens.
>> You don't have to upload the documentation yourself. Every few days I
>> run a script which builds and uploads the documentation.
> That's good. Thanks, for doing this, Daniel!

For the record, I'm still unsure about which procedure to follow,
but I'm glad to know that there are other reasonable solutions.

I still dislike having to regen the docs when I am offline. While
it is true that Eric says it's just a bjam away, well, it's still
a bjam away. Often, I am in the middle of something and I need to
know a function or typedef or something. Having to bjam and wait for
the regen to finish just to get that crucial info gets in the way
of the thought-flow. OTOH, I'm mostly online anyway. And, you can always
have the full release at hand, with all the docs; -- unless of course
when you need something new from the trunk.

There's always a tradeoff, if anyone else out there cares about this,
then please share your voice for the sake of consensus.


Joel de Guzman

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at